Hi Ulrich,
Mike Roth just posted a mechanism to implement per-device unit tests. I
think this is a great example to use for what type of testing we should
be doing in QEMU.
Please take a look at Mike's series and see if you can do something
similar for HPET as he's doing for the RTC.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
On 02/03/2011 02:07 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 02/03/2011 09:28 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-03 14:43, Ulrich Obergfell wrote:
Hi,
I am observing severe backward time drift in a MS Windows Vista(tm)
guest running on a Fedora 14 KVM host. I can reproduce the problem
with the following steps:
1. Use 'vncviewer' to connect to the guest's desktop.
2. Click on the menu title bar of a window on the guest's desktop.
3. Move that window around on the guest's desktop.
While I keep on moving the window around for one minute, the guest
time falls up to 15 seconds behind host time.
The problem is caused by delayed callbacks of hpet_timer(). A timer
interrupt is injected into the guest during each callback. However,
interrupts are lost if delays are greater than a comparator period.
Yes, that's a well known limitation of qemu, in fact. We are lacking a
generic irq coalescing infrastructure. That, once designed and
available, would also allow to fix the HPET.
I don't think it requires anything that sophisticated.
It's just the period calculation of the HPET that's wrong and doesn't
account for loss.
This is an RFC through which I would like to get feedback on how the
idea of a patch to compensate those lost interrupts would be received:
The patch determines the number of lost timer interrupts based on the
number of elapsed comparator periods. Lost interrupts are compensated
That neglects coalescing of the HPET IRQs: If the timer is run regularly
but the guest is not able to retrieve the injected IRQs, you should
still see drifts with your patches.
FWIW, this isn't the most common failure scenario. This is only
really prominent when you have rapid reinject like we do with the
in-kernel PIT. This generally shouldn't be an issue with gradual
reinjection.
by gradually injecting additional interrupts during the subsequent
timer intervals, starting at a rate of one additional interrupt per
interval. If further interrupts are lost while compensation is still
in progress, the rate is increased. The algorithm imposes a limit on
the rate and on the 'backlog' of lost interrupts to be injected. The
patch can be enabled via a qemu command line option.
-hpet [device=none|present][,driftfix=none|slew]
The 'device=none' option is equivalent to the '-no-hpet' option, and
the 'driftfix=slew' option enables the patch (similar to RTC).
The second and third part of this series of email contain the patch:
- Code part 1 introduces the qemu command line option.
- Code part 2 implements compensation of lost interrupts.
Please review and please comment.
Generally, this issue needs to be attacked at qemu level (added to CC),
not qemu-kvm.
We had a lengthy discussion on the list last year. We (including qemu
people) basically agreed that we needs a generic feedback infrastructure
to track coalesced IRQs for periodic, clock providing devices to allow
reinjection (which would include reinjection of completely missed timer
events like in your series).
This really isn't the main problem.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
However, there was one unsolved design issue remain IIRC:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/73181
Once we have a proper answer for this, we can resume creating the
de-coalescing framework.
Jan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
